Wyjścia 28:10 Komentarz: Rashi, Da'at Zekenim, Or HaChaim & Rabbeinu Bahya

כתולדתם ACCORDING TO THEIR BIRTH — in the order in which they were born: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali upon one, and upon the other Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benjamin — the last name being written full (plene, with a י before the last letter, thus: בנימין) for that is how it is written in the passage that tells of his birth (Genesis 35:18). This gives twenty-five letters on each stone (cf. Sotah 36a).

כתולדותם, “according to the order in which they were born.” Rashi interprets the meaning of the word as we have translated it here. His grandson, Rabbeinu Tam, does not agree, seeing that an analysis will show that Dan was not listed in the order of the birth of the twelve tribes’ births, seeing that he had been the fifth son born to Yaakov, and in the Book of Joshua 19,47, we read: “they called the name of the town according to the names of their forefather.” It would appear therefore that what was meant in our verses here is that the names of the tribes appeared on the jewels of the Ephod in the sequence in which these sons had been born by their respective mothers. The sons of Leah are mentioned first in order of their births, followed by the sons of Bilhah, in accordance with their births, followed by the sons of Zilpah in accordance of their births, followed by the sons of Rachel. You will find that the jewel Leshem was that alluding to Dan, and the jewel yoshpah alluded to Binyamin. This is the way they appear in the liturgist’s poem known as krovatz recited prior to the kedushah on Purim morning commencing with the words: ויאהב אומן. The Talmud in tractate Sotah folio 36, has a different order. The names of the tribes appeared in a different order on the two jewels of the Ephod (epaulettes) worn by the High Priest. Some commentators were concerned with the total numbers of letters of the tribes’ names being equally divided, i.e. 50 on one side of the Ephod and 50 on the other side. This, of course, would account for the names not appearing in the same order as the names on the breastplate. [As it is impossible at this stage to decide whose opinion is correct, I have not translated the balance of our author’s remarks on the subject. A booklet named bigdey kehunah by Rabbi Israel Chayim Blumenthal, elaborates on the various alternatives. Ed.]

ששה משמותם על האבן האחת, "Six of their names on the one stone, etc." Why did the Torah use the unusual expression משמותם, "of their names," instead of saying simply ששה שמות, "six names," etc.? Besides, the word הנותרים, "the remaining ones," is quite unnecessary as we all know that there were only a total of twelve tribes. We are therefore forced to conclude that the adjective "the remaining ones," implies that the latter six tribes were inferior to the the first six. We find something similar after the death of Nadav and Avihu, where the Torah describes Eleazar and Ittamar as the "remaining" sons of Aaron (Leviticus 10,12). Our sages in Yuma 87 describe the word הנותרים as referring to something inferior, using the word in Leviticus as their example. Bereshit Rabbah 73,9 discusses Genesis 30,36 where the Torah speaks about "the remaining flocks of Laban," and also describes the word "remaining" as referring to something inferior. If the meaning of the word הנותרים in our verse were to indicate that these tribes were inferior, this is most surprising seeing that the Torah underlines that they were recorded כתולדותם, "in the order of their (their founder's) birth." Why would the sons born to Jacob later be inferior to those born to him earlier? This seems especially unlikely seeing that Joseph was Jacob's favorite and is known as "Joseph the righteous." How could he be considered "inferior?" Moreover, we find that amongst the first 6 names listed are sons of the maidservants whereas several of the names inscribed on the second stone were of sons born by Jacob's true wives!